Not only are the limits of translatibility a challenge for linguistics and translation studies but they also set up a philosophical problem in its own right. Such a problem dates back to times immemorial, as is materialized by the biblical myth of Babel. Through the use of the Babel & Logos couple as two polysemic figures, I delve into the co-substantial philosophical issues which both develop and even precede the reality of translation. What is the nature of the relations between translation studies and philosophy? Struggling as it does between the universalism of reason (Logos) and the particularism of idioms (Babel), translation definitely has anthropological groundings. What are the philosophical prerequisites for translation seen as inter-cultural communication? Translation raises the issue of the unity or diversity of mankind, as was already hinted at by so many mythological themes. Eventually, I endeavour to point out that translation makes it possible to bring into awareness the concept of “theological unconscious” of modernity — and of translation proper.

The aim of this paper is to discuss the relationships between translation and contemporary theories of language. It is argued that these theories are still attached to the story of Babel: First, diversities are considered second to what is universal. Second, the speaker is considered as one who speaks one language. Third, There is a presupposed distinction between expression and content. Translation as an argument against these theses will therefore open up for a new theory of language.

A text is not only related to the author and the reader, but also to other texts. It contains intertextual links, such as quotations, allusions and references, which are especially difficult to translate. By translating them literally, the meaning may be lost. The translator has to help the reader by providing explicitations, notes and so on, but this may change the overall effect of the text. The problem is especially acute when the quoted text is not well-known in the target culture. A possible solution is to stress the function of the intertextual links. Several examples taken from German literature (Kafka, Fontane) are given to illustrate the above difficulties.Each text exists within a general network which is like a vast society of texts. In the second part of the article, it is shown that a translated text has its own place on the intertextual web, which can never be the same as that of the original. The translator must accept this reality, which turns a translation into a living work. Intertextuality does not limit translation - the two enjoy a close and very fruitful relationship.

The first part of this paper discusses a number of seemingly obvious statements on the problems besetting the translation of culture, arguing that they should be reconsidered in the light of current technological developments. The second part of the paper shows first that many cultural elements present for instance in a literary source text can be transmitted by the story it tells, without raising difficulties specific to culture. It goes on to review a few theoretical principles that can help translators overcome the linguistic difficulties in translating culture.

This article challenges the traditional view that something is always lost in translation. First, it investigates its so-called shortcomings generally ascribed not only to linguistic and cultural differences but also to the fact that translation always ranks second and eventually becomes outmoded while the original text is unaffected by the passage of time. Then it goes on to show that these are not essential features of the translating process but the result of basic misconceptions about the nature and function of translation. To overcome such weaknesses, it advocates the use of a creative textual approach based on the interpretive model developed at E.S.I.T.

Shamsoddin Mohammad-e Hâfez is probably the finest lyrical poet in the history of the Persian language, but his poetry defies translation and remains virtually unknown to the outside world. By means of examples, this paper tries to show what a translator will have to cope with. First arise the difficulties of translating from an alien culture with values and aesthetic norms different from ours, making it next to impossible to find equivalents with connotations similar to those of the words used in the original. Secondly, one confronts the impossibility of doing justice to the subtle wordplays and brilliant comparisons that occur in almost every line. Finally, Hâfez expected his audience to know their classics by heart and to be willing to memorise his own poetry as well, and therefore often wrote in an extremely condensed form.

The aim of this paper is to discuss if ambiguity limits translation. A theoretical distinction is made between intentional ambiguity and fortuitous ambiguity. Whereas intentional ambiguity is seen to be a matter of consciousness possessing a communicational value, fortuitous ambiguity, being a matter of language, is devoid of communicational value. In the first case, the translator is expected to recreate the special effect produced in the source text by the original author. In the second case, the translator can treat the polysemic or homonymic term as if it were monosemic. In the second part of the paper, a processoriented experimental on-line study carried out on three expert translators sets out to test to what degree fortuitous ambiguities are felt to be problematic. One occurrence of fortuitous ambiguity is analysed in-depth. Although polysemy gives rise to multiple interpretations, the processual data show that the expert translators are not even aware of the «ambiguity potential» in the polysemic word in the utterance. Their focus being on making sense in the target text, their cognitive efforts are solely directed towards decision-making on other levels, such as establishing lexical precision, clarity, and text coherence. Ambiguity does not appear to be a problem of translation.

This article raises the question of untranslatability on different levels: in general, for a specific text into a specific language and for a certain stylistic means called animism. Animism has been defined in different manners in a large number of scientific disciplines, but all definitions have in common that attributes of the livings are given to dead objects. A study conducted with Think-aloud protocols (TAPs) set out to verify whether a certain number of hypotheses about animisms were well known among translators and non translators of French into Norwegian. Eight subjects were given the task to translate a short French text into Norwegian meanwhile thinking aloud. The subjects were not aware of the goal of the experiment. It was still found that many of them verbalised thoughts that can be related to the animism issue and the question of untranslatability.

The French language disposes of subtle means of indicating free indirect discourse or style, such as the variation between passé simple and imparfait, the indefinite pronoun on and the demonstrative determiner ce. The dual voice they give rise to in virtue of their double anchoring in the speech situation and the narration is a challenge in translation into a language lacking these means. Even if Swedish has formal correspondants to on and ce, these are not used in the same way in narrative texts. Two Swedish translations of Guy de Maupassant’s Une vie reveal, in spite of their differences, that other markers, such as the combination of the preterit tense with the deictic adverb nu (‘now’), familiar and evaluative expressions, and adverbs of modality, are chosen to mark free indirect discourse and indicate the subjective point of view of represented thought.

A contrastive study of demonstrative clauses in texts translated from French into Norwegian and in Norwegian source texts. Translation strategy or translationese? This study, which is based on a corpus of non fictional texts, aims at describing how the use of demonstrative clauses differs in texts translated from French into Norwegian and Norwegian source texts. The target texts contain 30% more demonstrative clauses than the source texts. The study shows that in many cases demonstrative clauses in the target texts correspond to other types of expressions in the source texts. The target texts add information that is implicit in the source texts and the use of demonstrative clauses can therefore be considered as the result of an explicitation strategy. The study also reveals a stylistical difference in the use of demonstrative clauses in French and Norwegian. These clauses are often used in French to introduce new information about a referent, a discourse strategy which is much more seldom used in Norwegian. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that the frequent use of this particular type of demonstrative clause in texts translated from French into Norwegian can be described as an instance of translationese.

The enlargement of the European Union to ten new member countries and nine languages constitutes an all-time challenge for the Union’s Linguistic Services. Previous enlargements have only had to cope with a maximum of two new languages. In order to guarantee controlled multilingualism, (equality of all official languages, and the right for the members of the European Parliament to use their own language) all will have to make the best possible usage of scarce linguistic resources. To cover their needs, the new Member Countries will have to make a considerable effort to train competent linguists. However, with controlled multilingualism applied rationally, the present enlargement will no doubt take place without the limits of translatability being reached.